Posted on 08/23/2019 8:49:31 PM PDT by libstripper
Full title of article:
"Michael Drejka found guilty of manslaughter in parking lot shooting that led to 'Stand Your Ground' trial"
Text of excerpt:
Michael Drejka, who fatally shot an unarmed man, Markeis McGlockton, last summer in Florida during a dispute over a handicapped-accessible parking spot, was found guilty of manslaughter Friday night.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
Impressive.
I thought it was a legal shoot personally, but I guess he won’t have to worry about policing parking spots for some time now.
Bad shoot.
The video showed that the goon had backed off, but you don’t know what goes through the mind of a person trying to defend himself at a moment like that. Perhaps it’s better not to carry if your judgement isn’t razor-sharp.
Wish everyone would get that. You never shoot to kill, you shoot to stop the threat of death or grave bodily injury to you or someone else. When the threat stops you stop. Period. If the threat retreats it’s over. You don’t chase and finish it. Even if it’s an azzhole.
Should have argued he thought he was retreating to regroup and attack again.
Had he been a cop he would now be off, scott-free:
“Feared for my life..!”
—case closed—
This attack and the "retreat" happened within seconds.
If you are wearing a gun you do not go out and aggressively confront people who did not confront you first.
Any gun class makes it very clear as a carrier you should not instigate any sort of potentially violent situation. They also teach avoidance whenever possible.
This fool should not have been carrying a firearm.
I had a neighbor, who fortunately has moved, that carried a firearm and chip on his shoulder. In my opinion he was a disaster waiting to happen.
“Wish everyone would get that. You never shoot to kill, you shoot to stop the threat of death or grave bodily injury to you or someone else. When the threat stops you stop. Period. If the threat retreats it’s over. You don’t chase and finish it. Even if it’s an azzhole.”
I think you have that backwards. If you pull a gun, there should be no doubt in your mind as to what a gun is used for. It is a lethal weapon.
“If I pull it out, there is no doubt. Someone is getting shot, and I don’t shoot to wound.
Michael Drejka started it. He was the original aggressor. Maybe he felt like a tough guy because he had a gun.
It's people like Drejka that give gun owners a bad reputation as violent, irrational, hot-heads and erode our right to use a gun as self-defense.
If they start chipping away at 'stand your ground' laws, blame Drejka.
I have no pity, no sympathy for this jerk.
>> You never shoot to kill
Wrong.
>> You don’t chase and finish it.
Right — generally speaking.
“I think you have that backwards...I don’t shoot to wound.”
Morality aside, a lot depends on the local law where the shooting takes place.
Some places it’s not legal to shoot to kill, nor is it legal to shoot to wound. It’s only legal to shoot someone to stop that someone from killing or doing grievous harm. Death or wounding is a side effect of stopping. State the intent to kill or wound, after or before the event, and your statement may be used against you in court.
I read a little bit of the court proceedings and there is no doubt that he knew the law.
His father was a cop and he used many words/phrases in his speech that shows he is well informed.
He did claim that all he saw after being knocked down is feet, legs and hips coming toward him, or close to him, I forget which.
I did not see the video. However if he had a blow to the head that caused confusion, blurred vision or caused him to fear for his life, it is possible that he did not see things the same as the video.
My own opinion is that the guy who got shot brought it on himself and well deserved it.
No matter what was said, no matter how heated an argument gets, violence is not allowed. A person who will fight you over words is very likely to kill you over words or at the very least do severe and lasting physical damage.
In short, the law does not allow you to physically attack someone over what they say, regardless of how unpleasant their words might be.
I think he had a ineffective lawyer or that would have been the cornerstone of his defense.
Regardless of my opinion, what is morally justified is not always legal and even what may be legal is not going to save your hide in court every time.
As in most cases like this, two people with very poor judgment met head on with a fatal result.
Therefore the best self protection advice is: At all costs avoid confrontations. A low profile is the best defense.
I disagree with that, and agree with Equine1952.
Decades ago, when I was young and stupid I had an encounter. I was parked in my car with my date, talking before dropping her off at her house across the street. Then "bam!", another car that was parking in front of my car backed into mine.
I jumped out and started arguing with the black driver, who had been drinking. Told him he hit my car, he denied it. I grabbed him by the collar and was about to hit him with my fist when his black girlfriend came out of her house and yelled at me to let him go. She was pointing a revolver at my face, and her hands holding the gun were shaking. So I let go of the guy, put my hands up and backed away, and told her "Okay, I'm out of here!". She put the gun away, and helped her boyfriend into her house.
A few days later I visited my girlfriend, and the black woman was in front of her house. She smiled and said "How ya doing?". I smiled back and spoke warmly to her. No tension, no problems. If she had reacted as you suggest, and shoot the gun because she had pulled it on me, then I could have been killed. Instead, she used it to defuse the threat to her boyfriend. And no more. I've had guns pulled on me several times, and never got shot. I didn't have guns back then, but I have them now. Please don't be trigger happy, but attempt to defuse a bad situation first.
I would only pull a gun if if I felt my life or that of another was in immediate mortal danger, hence; no doubt. If a gun is pulled out prematurely, it can lead to an unwanted escalation of violence.
I saw the video, and it is not as clear cut as you make it.
Sure looked to me like the guy who got shot pushed him violently to the ground, backed off to see the result and was preparing to come in with a kick.
His last moves were not those of a man in retreat, they were those of a MMA fighter getting ready to really hurt someone...
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
But, the guy with the gun was not thinking at all. He is not the parking lot police and shouldn't act like he is.
Many of us pointed out at the time that this would be the result of a trial. It was never in doubt.
Watch it. Drejka was the aggressor. Markeis McGlockton was also standing his ground and defending his girlfriend against a screaming manica, Drejak.
Rosenwasser said the case was "cut and dry," the killing of a man who came out to protect his girlfriend from a self-proclaimed "parking lot vigilante" with a "pet peeve" about enforcing handicap parking rules.
Therefore the best self protection advice is: At all costs avoid confrontations. A low profile is the best defense.
Again, watch the video.
Drejka was the original aggressor. He did anything but keep a low profile. He verbally confront a woman sitting in a car and her boyfriend came out to defend and protect her against a raving nut job.
There is no defense for this creep. Drejka gives responsible gun owners a black eye and that he tried to use 'stand your ground' as a defense when HE started it is reprehensible.
This self-appointed parking lot cop isn't worth defending.
That is the exact training I got too. If your first shot hits him between the eyes, that will stop the threat. If the dude dies because of it, that is a chance he took, and he is not a threat anymore. In a court of law, the phrase was ALWAYS, “I shot to stop the threat.” If it takes 5 shots to stop the threat, or one shot, you shoot to stop the threat, and then stop shooting. Period. 😁😆
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.